Jump to content
The World News Media

Jehovah’s Witnesses Sue FaithLeaks Owners Over Convention Videos


Isabella

Recommended Posts

  • Member
2 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

Well Tom and James seem to think your GB cannot be removed or fired, so it would seem that your GB have absolute power over the CCJW and Watchtower soc. 

4J:

You seem to get disoriented and confused very easily, about who said what. Your credibility is already shot , with me, irregardless of the credibility of any arguments you may proffer, because of that.

2020-05-10_122622.jpg

 

And MY point is there is no one on Earth that has the power to fire the Governing Body for any reason whatsoever ... and I am lamenting that fact ... NOT exulting in it.

That makes them unaccountable to anyone, and immune to consequences for ANYTHING they do, at least inside the WTB&TS.

The same thing was true in Jesus' time ... but Jesus himself commanded that Jews "stay with that system", until he himself replaced it.

The GB is supposed to show mercy to us, but can't, because of policy.

That does NOT mean we can't be understanding that they are deeply flawed men, trapped in a system they created, and have no idea how to change it.

"STUFF HAPPENS" (paraphrased)

Get used to it ... that's the way things REALLY are.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 3.6k
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I would be stunned if the WTB&TS, et al, was successful in their lawsuits, as in the United States the concept of "whistleblowers" is held in very high regard, and the "Fair Use Doctrine" of U.S.

Matthew 5 v 38 through 42  “You heard that it was said: ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ 39  However, I say to you: Do not resist the one who is wicked, but whoever slaps you on your right chee

As individuals they are accountable not as a group. If one of them breaks Jehovahs laws they will appoint a committee. 

Posted Images

  • Member

@James Thomas Rook Jr. Sometimes it is not always the case, for there are other entities and or institutions, if put in the same spot, would do the same. An example of this, I will not name the entity, one of their biggest and well hidden network infrastructure spaces had an incident (a breach and attempted theft), and they not only committed to a 10 month long investigation, but they took action by means getting the police involved. Mind you, this investigation was an internal one, so not everyone of this entity knew what was going on, for they were only aware of new security polices that were put in place. This same entity did not care about the innocent bystanders involved and axed them just to be on the safe side.

That being said, if it is indeed their resource and or property, I see no reason at all.

Also your bank accounts are safe, hence the incident I've mentioned - you are welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 5/10/2020 at 5:31 PM, Arauna said:

As individuals they are accountable not as a group. If one of them breaks Jehovahs laws they will appoint a committee. 

That's pretty much it. Any group of people be it of a faith or even race, the action of one person does not define the actions of others, for someone to have such a mind said is professing bigotry in some way or form, this is the same case I am currently making with the Ahmaud Abrey shooting to ignorant folks that think everything they see on the news is 100% accurate.

Going back to God's Laws, yes, imperfect people will indeed break something, but never can it be an excuse to assume that because one person did something, everyone else is the same, a strong case I made against Mr. B on this forum several times over, as is with Witness and the others, whom as a collective, do not understand a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Quote "as is with Witness and the others, whom as a collective, do not understand a thing. "

Someone else it seems that has a need to put people into one group. 

Quote "but never can it be an excuse to assume that because one person did something, everyone else is the same "

The Governing Body of CCJW say they are the Faithful and Discreet Slave. So the 8 men act as one. They work together, they make the rules for CCJW, they are responsible for Watchtower material. They are not individuals, they are a 'body'.  Therefor they are jointly responsible. 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
22 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

Quote "as is with Witness and the others, whom as a collective, do not understand a thing. "

Someone else it seems that has a need to put people into one group. 

Quote "but never can it be an excuse to assume that because one person did something, everyone else is the same "

The Governing Body of CCJW say they are the Faithful and Discreet Slave. So the 8 men act as one. They work together, they make the rules for CCJW, they are responsible for Watchtower material. They are not individuals, they are a 'body'.  Therefor they are jointly responsible. 

 

They are an octinity:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

 

On 5/12/2020 at 3:34 PM, 4Jah2me said:

Quote "as is with Witness and the others, whom as a collective, do not understand a thing. "

Someone else it seems that has a need to put people into one group. 

Quote "but never can it be an excuse to assume that because one person did something, everyone else is the same "

The Governing Body of CCJW say they are the Faithful and Discreet Slave. So the 8 men act as one. They work together, they make the rules for CCJW, they are responsible for Watchtower material. They are not individuals, they are a 'body'.  Therefor they are jointly responsible. 

 

There is no need to be fearful to simply mention me (I know my responses), for as I recall, you did this last time when you made a false assumption, without mentioning me, and I asked you for evidence, you shy'd away.

What what is said is indeed the truth, the collective make remarks and assertions and bunch everyone into one group together (and there is a multitude of information of misuse of verses, accusations, mocking the actions of God, and believing something to be true when it is not, as with the hypocrisy of stating, and I quote one of them "I do not care or want to learn these things" yet the latter assumes what she has posted as a truth, mocking abuse, alluding to homosexuality as something formulated by God, and so forth). Despite such, the collective agreed that such is a truth despite the fact the real truth shatters the very armor they adorn themselves in and buckles their knees, more so, said folks attempted to make absurd accusations, I still recall one that backfired on said person on her own thread relating to women. A mentioned, even you made an assumption, proven to me false, and thus mark everyone as the same without understanding the view.

Now let's break down what you mentioned. No one is ignorant to the fact that most faith groups, be it organized and or not, have religious leaders, granted the focus is on the Jehovah's Witnesses, among them are the governing body. The term "governing body" is self explanatory, the definition states: a group of people who formulate the policy and direct the affairs of an institution in partnership with the managers, especially on a voluntary or part-time basis.

A more in-depth definition is: A governing body is a group of people that has the authority to exercise governance over an organization or political entity. The most formal is a government, a body whose sole responsibility and authority is to make binding decisions in a given geopolitical system (such as a state) by establishing laws.

Governing Bodies are in various institutions, not solely in religious institutions, I am sure you've grown up going to school to get some basic education, something of this matter should be known to you, if you are unaware, they it is safe to assume you do not pay attention. Moreover, if we are to have any example, we have the Apostolic governing body (or council) in ancient times, otherwise known as The Council of Jerusalem. Another example being the involvement of such bodies regarding the Gentiles and Circumcision. For, before Paul's conversion to the faith, Christianity, or Christians were part of the second Judaism Temple.

The Non-Jews, Gentiles, who wished to join Christianity, which at the time was mostly consist of Jewish followers, were expected to convert to Judaism, which likely meant in order to go about such, a grown male is to undergo circumcision for the uncircumcised, as is with following the dietary restrictions. Long story short, Apostle Paul insisted that faith in Christ was  required and is sufficient for one to seek out salvation and that the Mosaic Law was not as binding to the Gentiles compared to the Jews, and of course if you read this part of the Bible, you'd recognized of how things played out, none of these people were "Yes-Men". Planning and execution was in apply, and forwards the application.

Regarding JWs, it is stated that: The Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses is the ruling council of Jehovah's Witnesses based in the group's Warwick, New York headquarters. The body formulates doctrines, oversees the production of written material for publications and conventions, and administers the group's worldwide operations. Official publications refer to members of the Governing Body as followers of Christ rather than religious leaders.

That being said, what is mentioned is vastly different from what was stated by various folks here in the past on this forums, as for me I still see it as Controversial Posts, so I will continue to bring forth said accusations that have been refuted. Therefore, the statement I made is true when it comes to mixed information promoted by said collective that are "yes-man" to everything, hence assuming the actions of one person is somehow befitting of all people, which isn't the same as any governing body within any institution whereas planning and execution is involved, not merely agreeing "yes, yes, yes, of course" to everything without being presented with information.

On 5/13/2020 at 2:28 PM, Matthew9969 said:

They are an octinity:)

I guess Apostle Paul and the others was the same according to you. Regardless, regarding a collective in such institutions, what they have taken steps to differs from said collective here that agrees with each other not realizing the information is mixed and or missing some parts. Irony enough, when so and so's say something that is ridiculous absurd, the latter are often as quiet as church mice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 5/12/2020 at 4:18 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I think it was Robert A. Heinlein that once said something like " A Committee is a life form with at least six legs,... and no brain".

Pretty much - So if I like Waffles, you are to agree and say yes - no exceptions, you like waffles too, when in secret, you like pancakes.

Now if there any planning and execution involved as a whole, coming to an understanding of what is fact and true, both sides can agree and like waffles as well as pancakes.

 

That being said, what I mentioned the other day is pretty much how things are handled by some, even by cooperate, so things of the sort can result in an action from said entity, hence suing and or other means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@Space Merchant  I am not frightened to mention you by name, why should I be ?

It was more the use of sarcasm not to mention your name, and look it got a reaction :).

I tend to disagree with most things you say, but I laugh too, because you try so hard to come across as someone who is superior. 

I know for myself that i am an individual. It matter not to me if you and others feel the need to add me to some 'make believe' 'collective'. 

I did quite like this bit though :-

A more in-depth definition is: A governing body is a group of people that has the authority to exercise governance over an organization or political entity. The most formal is a government, a body whose sole responsibility and authority is to make binding decisions in a given geopolitical system (such as a state) by establishing laws.

Now here in the UK the ruling Government has an opposition party. I know very little about politics but I do know there are two 'houses', the House of Lords and the House of Commons. So there is debate and questioning.  Also the people of the UK can vote for a different government every 5 years. And, parliament can be dissolved in some cases.  

However the Governing Body of CCJW  rules over millions of people without debate and questioning. Those 8 men that has the authority to exercise governance, and are a body whose sole responsibility and authority is to make binding decisions,  cannot be removed, according to some JWs on this forum. 

They have given themselves the title 'Faithful and Discreet Slave', and they cannot be disfellowshipped by other JWs.  

But you seem to think that is ok, however you do not want to become a JW :).

I totally disagree with most of what you say SM, but. Have a good day. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That was convoluted and strange. I assume it was that way on purpose. I have not tried to refute anything from VAT 4956. My "acceptance" of the evidence from VAT 4956 is not the same thing as "refuting" it. Unless you are doing that thing again where you say you can use words to mean whatever you want. Now you are doing that thing again where you hope to imply that the stance of 100% of the current "authorities" and "experts" the Watchtower has quoted just happen to agree with COJ. So, in order to make it easier to dismiss the conclusions of all those experts, you need to point out that those experts agree with COJ, therefore you can dismiss their conclusions.  This is not just stupid. It's dishonest because you have done it before. It's also hypocritical because you have never once ever been able to point out even one sentence from his GTR book that was wrong. When you finally did attempt to prove he was wrong about something, you picked his reference to Nabopolassar's years mentioned in the "Chronicles," you ended up inadvertently showing that COJ was perfectly accurate. That must have been embarrassing. As you know, COJ has nothing to do with this discussion. From now on, instead of referring to COJ directly, I think we should just refer call him, "the person that George88 has shown to be accurate." In fact, until you can show even one inaccurate sentence, that's how I will refer to "COJ, the person that George88 has shown to be accurate."
    • Try not to manipulate my words with your usual tactics. I said: "I’m sure you know by now that there is absolutely nothing in the diary indicating the year 588." I said this in direct response to your claim that the events on the tablet indicated 588. You said that the events on the tablet indicated 588. You said: "You can reference VAT 4956." . . .  "Why is this so significant? Pay extremely close attention to the language inscribed on this tablet" . . . "Year 37 of Nebukadnezzar, King of Babylon. Month I," . .  "Additional reports in this Diary include . . . Borsippa, . . . .This indicates that the conflict in that region in 588 . . . " No, you didn't actually say that. Besides I have no argument about 587. I only point out that ALL the astronomical evidence from the entire period shows that this was Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year. You have never made an argument (either valid or invalid) that "my argument about 587 can also be interpreted as 588."  Not that it matters in the least, but Borsippa is NOT way further in distance from Jerusalem. It's about 10 miles CLOSER "as the crow flies" and nearly the same distance using the usual travel routes of the time. Perhaps that's why no one mentioned it before. However, even here, I have already posted the entire contents of the tablet, including the reference to Borsippa. Not that it matters.  I certainly hope so!
    • That's completely false. You invariably attempt to weasel your way out of your false statements by claiming that someone has distorted your words. You make false claims about them and claim that they are the ones in the wrong. Then you bluster with some barely-related material hoping it impresses someone (or yourself) into thinking you are some kind of expert or authority. That barely-related material you make use of invariably says nearly the opposite of what you had claimed, which you should have known had you just read the context, or understood what you were reading.  I'll get to the specifics at a later time on this particular point, but it is nearly the same as with almost all these matters. I have learned to expect you to NEVER admit an error, no matter how much evidence is shown. I don't expect you to admit your error on these recent points, but your "style" provides a revealing display of the lengths people will go to, in order to support a pseudo-chronology.   
    • In response to your email, it is important to note that the Watchtower chronology begins at 4026, adhering closely to the numerical indications in scripture. The significant distinction lies in the fact that not everyone begins at 4026; some might commence their chronology at 4004, for instance. Consequently, this creates a noticeable gap between those who employ different starting points for their chronologies. Consider that the new Bible Students have rejected Russell's starting point and instead adjusted it to align with Modern Israel. They have suggested a year around 3954, or something like that, I can't remember, but it seems unfounded. Some of their sects started Criticizing Russell about this matter, and it appears unjustified, as their own knowledge may be limited. Following the Watchtower's guidance is straightforward: align events with their corresponding numerical values. It is important to remember that the Watchtower does not view its chronology as an absolute, unlike secular chronology which seeks to impose its perspective. According to the Watchtower, the pivotal date for the divided kingdom is 997. Look it up in our archives and publications.  The Watchtower's chronology will always diverge from conventional chronology due to its distinctive starting point. The organization holds steadfast to the numbers in the Bible, guided by faith in scripture rather than human interpretations. Despite persistent challenges, the unwavering stance of the Watchtower remains unchanged, as it is grounded in divine guidance, not the opinions of anonymous and faithless individuals.
    • Consider this: if we assume that the tablet dated back to 568 refers to Nebuchadnezzar, and that the king issued an order for Borsippa, a city 12-15 miles from Babylon, then it suggests that King Nebuchadnezzar might have been in his palace giving that order, since logically it would have taken weeks or a month or so for a runner to dispatch such an order from Judah that was for Borsippa in 588/587, as historically suggested, since we can use the same date 588/587 for that event.
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.3k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.